Welsh Chappie, Subject: Anyone know who this is referring to? Mon Mar 04, 2013 9:33 am

Just came across this in the FBI files and have no idea who the witness the document is reffering to, nor the suspect. Maybe someone can help…

I’m not sure, due to the way this is worded, if the document is reffering to a witness who is eight years of age, or weather it’s saying that an eight year old witness (A witness from eight years previous). It can’t be the second option because the first page of the Doc is Dated Nov 6th, 1969.

So, who is this eight year old witness, and who is the ‘possible suspect he identified’?

morf13, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Mon Mar 04, 2013 10:11 am

I had asked this same thing before. The kid is likely one oof the kids in the window. If I was a betting man, I think they may be referring to Aubrey D. Bailey who lived in SF,bit this is ONLY a guess based on the length of the name,and its aprox closeness to Bailey-

PHOT FROM 1953

Welsh Chappie, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Mon Mar 04, 2013 10:41 am

I had asked this same thing before. The kid is likely one oof the kids in the window. If I was a betting man, I think they may be referring to Aubrey D. Bailey who lived in SF,bit this is ONLY a guess based on the length of the name,and its aprox closeness to Bailey-

PHOT FROM 1953

That’s what i first thought. But weren’t the witnesses aged 16, 14 & 13, all teenagers? Maybe they kept it quiet that an 8 year old was a witnesses because he was so young?

morf13, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Mon Mar 04, 2013 10:45 am

Aren’t most 8 year olds in bed by that time of night?

Welsh Chappie, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Mon Mar 04, 2013 10:58 am

Aren’t most 8 year olds in bed by that time of night?

Well you could say that he was woke by the sound of a gunshot, but the other teens didn’t report hearing one, nor anyone else that i’m aware of, so unlikely to be that.
It was a weekend, maybe the 8 year old was allowed to stay up untill 10 when the shooting happened? I don’t know. But if he claims to have recognised the man (I know, this is an 8 year old’s ID), and Don Fouke originally saying Z went North on Maple (If memory serves me), then maybe there is something to it?

There must be an 8 year old that witnessed it cause he’s refered to in the FBI Document.

StitchMallone, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Mon Mar 04, 2013 2:33 pm

Morf what is it that you think makes Bailey tied to this report ?

morf13, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Mon Mar 04, 2013 3:06 pm

Morf what is it that you think makes Bailey tied to this report ?

Just a guess,I have no evidence of it. I know the FBI San Fran division presented him as a suspect,and I know he died in San fran. The name is about the right length as well,but again, just a possibility,nothing in stone

StitchMallone, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Mon Mar 04, 2013 3:08 pm

Ah okay thanks for explaining.

morf13, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Mon Mar 04, 2013 3:12 pm

As a matter of fact,if you look closely, it reads ‘8 year old identified ______ as possible subject in this matter’. The name is about the length of BAILEY

StitchMallone, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Mon Mar 04, 2013 3:20 pm

As a matter of fact,if you look closely, it reads ‘8 year old identified ______ as possible subject in this matter’. The name is about the length of BAILEY

Yep it looks like it would fit.

traveller1st, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Mon Mar 04, 2013 5:58 pm

Nope,

I was looking at the length right after WC’s first post and I think the last name is 7 letters. Bailey is only 6.

I have also fleshed out the other parts of the name. Depending on how the information is normally written you either have a remainder of 10 character if the name starts with Mr. If not then there is a remainder of 13 characters that most likely contains at least two names and a space.

Shown here is the Mr option and also aligned characters to the surname later on in the document to show how it’s 7 characters with a space either side.

morf13, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Mon Mar 04, 2013 6:04 pm

Well,I guess we know it isnt MR X, or GAIKOWSKI.
By the way,in every report I have seen, they do not refer to suspects as MR., only first & last name with middle initial usually. If only they did not black out the dates of birth too.

You better be careful Trav or you may start getting requests to enhance those redacted black lines, and make the names appear

StitchMallone, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:03 pm

Lol My Ray fits the last name. Seriously how many letters is the first name without the Mr then ? This got me thinking of some of the popular suspects from San Francisco and right now Rick Marshall is the only one I can think of at the moment.

StitchMallone, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:11 pm

Well,I guess we know it isnt MR X, or GAIKOWSKI.
By the way,in every report I have seen, they do not refer to suspects as MR., only first & last name with middle initial usually. If only they did not black out the dates of birth too.

You better be careful Trav or you may start getting requests to enhance those redacted black lines, and make the names appear

Lol people from the JFK case would love that talent also.

StitchMallone, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:38 pm

Back on topic of the post I can’t see this witness being 8 years old and am thinking the witness came forward 8 years after the Stine shooting ? As for the Stine murder all that’s every mentioned are the teenagers and Fouke. So who the heck is this witness and why wasn’t they mentioned elsewhere ? Did one of the teenagers come forward again 8 years later to identify someone they know that fits the guy they seen that night ?

traveller1st, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:39 pm

Well,I guess we know it isnt MR X, or GAIKOWSKI.
By the way,in every report I have seen, they do not refer to suspects as MR., only first & last name with middle initial usually. If only they did not black out the dates of birth too.

You better be careful Trav or you may start getting requests to enhance those redacted black lines, and make the names appear

Already tried – there’s no un-redacting this one – solid black.

Regarding the name format. Could be … 10 characters /space/initial/space 7 characters

StitchMallone, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:52 pm

From this form it seems to indicate that the witness identified a suspect. I remember Graysmith intervening the teenagers years later and no mention of them identifying any suspect. All that Graysmith says is that they told him Rick Marshall was to heavy to be the suspect they saw.

morf13, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:53 pm

From this form it seems to indicate that the witness identified a suspect. I remember Graysmith intervening the teenagers years later and no mention of them identifying any suspect. All that Graysmith says is that they told him Rick Marshall was to heavy to be the suspect they saw.

I dont think any of the kids that saw z in that house were 8 yrs old

StitchMallone, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:57 pm

From this form it seems to indicate that the witness identified a suspect. I remember Graysmith intervening the teenagers years later and no mention of them identifying any suspect. All that Graysmith says is that they told him Rick Marshall was to heavy to be the suspect they saw.

I dont think any of the kids that saw z in that house were 8 yrs old I know so who is this witness then ? Any guesses ?

StitchMallone, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Mon Mar 04, 2013 8:05 pm

Starting to make me wonder if a witness came forward years later and LE has kept them a secret witness and Graysmith and all might have be in the dark about this witness. Also has anyone seen page one to this and does it help any to clear this matter up ? My bad and see WC has seen the first page and if that’s the case how can the witness not be 8 years of age ?

Welsh Chappie, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Tue Mar 05, 2013 9:55 am

Starting to make me wonder if a witness came forward years later and LE has kept them a secret witness and Graysmith and all might have be in the dark about this witness. Also has anyone seen page one to this and does it help any to clear this matter up ? My bad and see WC has seen the first page and if that’s the case how can the witness not be 8 years of age ?

It can’t be a witness coming foreward eight years after the fact because the date shown on the first page of this document is Nov, 1969. So it seems that the witness was found at the time of the shooting. (Notice the date stamped into the bottom left hand corner of the document, Nov 12, 1969.

A partial DOB is visable.

smithy, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Tue Mar 05, 2013 12:20 pm

I thought I’d read that the youngest witness was indeed eight.
The police reports are confusing – but wasn’t it Pelisetti’s? Hmmm.

Welsh Chappie, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Tue Mar 05, 2013 12:58 pm

I thought I’d read that the youngest witness was indeed eight.
The police reports are confusing – but wasn’t it Pelisetti’s? Hmmm.

Never heard of a witness aged Eight Smithy, thats not to say there wasn’t one though it just isn’t something i’ve ever seen. The three witnesses in the house across the street were teenagers aged 16, 14 & 13 to the best of my knowledge.

tahoe27, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Tue Mar 05, 2013 1:31 pm

I have heard of the 8 year old witness.

Mr. X sure comes to mind…

traveller1st, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Tue Mar 05, 2013 2:00 pm

I’ve hears of the 8yr old as well. I thought I remembered watching a discussion about it ages ago so it would possibly be on ZKF. I had a look but couldn’t find anything so it might have been on here. I just vaguely remember something being posted that explained it or at least put forward likely suggestions as to what the deal was with it.

Sorry cant be of more help.

Welsh Chappie, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Tue Mar 05, 2013 2:11 pm

Yeah i think we can all agree there was a witness aged eight, but i assumed Smithy was saying he thought the youngest witness of the three at the house across the street was eight. (I should listen to a line from a character in the film ‘Chill Factor’ when he tell’s Cuba Gooding Jr "Assumptions are dangerous!")

So can we (for my own clarification) completely rule out the the eight year old in question was from the ‘Three teen witnesses’ place?

StitchMallone, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Tue Mar 05, 2013 2:15 pm

Not sure we can rule him out yet. What I want to know is did this 8 year old actual identify a suspect which it seems to indicate on page two ?

morf13, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Tue Mar 05, 2013 2:16 pm

Yeah i think we can all agree there was a witness aged eight, but i assumed Smithy was saying he thought the youngest witness of the three at the house across the street was eight. (I should listen to a line from a character in the film ‘Chill Factor’ when he tell’s Cuba Gooding Jr "Assumptions are dangerous!")

So can we (for my own clarification) completely rule out the the eight year old in question was from the ‘Three teen witnesses’ place?

So,maybe the kids (if the 8 year old was one of the kids in the window)were all shown photos of verious suspects,and the older kids didnt ID any,but the 8 year old picked one out of the lineup? Maybe the 8 year old is the only one that picked the guy out, therefore,he is the only one mentioned in the report and not the older ones

tahoe27, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Tue Mar 05, 2013 2:16 pm

I do think the 8 year old was in the house.

Maybe just not part of the original witnesses.

StitchMallone, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Tue Mar 05, 2013 2:18 pm

Yep Morf that’s what I want to know.

traveller1st, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Tue Mar 05, 2013 2:47 pm

I do think the 8 year old was in the house.

Maybe just not part of the original witnesses.

That sounds familiar.

Welsh Chappie, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Tue Mar 05, 2013 3:52 pm

I do think the 8 year old was in the house.

Maybe just not part of the original witnesses.

Thnx Tahoe, thats what i suspected was the case. The fact that the age of the witness is only 8, and that the witness may have said it was a specific person, are more than enough reason for LE for keep it quiet, they may have feared for this childs life. After all, Zodiac did threaten to kill school children within 48 hours fof killing the Cabbie.

smithy, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Wed Mar 06, 2013 4:36 am

Yeah i think we can all agree there was a witness aged eight, but i assumed Smithy was saying he thought the youngest witness of the three at the house across the street was eight….

Was I saying that? I suppose I was.
Is there a police report that confirms the ages you think they were – or some secondary source?
I don’t mind being wrong, dontcha know. It’s happened before.

The "eight year old" bit isn’t in the Pelisetti report of two pages (which interestingly doesn’t mention the dispatcher problem I note). I believe it’s in the report which talks about the detail of the cab being wiped down by the attacker, etc. Which is also his. I think.
I’m still looking. Why am I chasing this? I can’t remember now. Is it because we doubt the abilities of an eight year old to identify a subject? To alter the physical description accurately? Perhaps.

Welsh Chappie, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Wed Mar 06, 2013 5:21 am

Yeah i think we can all agree there was a witness aged eight, but i assumed Smithy was saying he thought the youngest witness of the three at the house across the street was eight….

Was I saying that? I suppose I was.
Is there a police report that confirms the ages you think they were – or some secondary source?
I don’t mind being wrong, dontcha know. It’s happened before.

The "eight year old" bit isn’t in the Pelisetti report of two pages (which interestingly doesn’t mention the dispatcher problem I note). I believe it’s in the report which talks about the detail of the cab being wiped down by the attacker, etc. Which is also his. I think.
I’m still looking. Why am I chasing this? I can’t remember now. Is it because we doubt the abilities of an eight year old to identify a subject? To alter the physical description accurately? Perhaps.

Just checked now Smithy, and the report of the incident says ‘The Reportee, along with the two other witnesses, *Blacked out name* age 14, and *Blacked out name*, age 13, same adress as reportee, stated that….’

So, i am guessing the ‘reportee’ is the elder of the three teens, aged 16. If not, then the third witness and ‘reportee’ was the 8 year old witness.

smithy, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Wed Mar 06, 2013 5:33 am

OK, thanks matey. Where are you reading that, can you chuck up a link, or just name the page and the site or something? It’ll stop me going around in circles!

Y’know one day we’ll have all the police report and FBI text on-line and searchable, so we can just go look, definitively.
Perhaps that’s a retirement project.

Welsh Chappie, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:01 am

Yeah i think we can all agree there was a witness aged eight, but i assumed Smithy was saying he thought the youngest witness of the three at the house across the street was eight….

Was I saying that? I suppose I was.
Is there a police report that confirms the ages you think they were – or some secondary source?
I don’t mind being wrong, dontcha know. It’s happened before.

The "eight year old" bit isn’t in the Pelisetti report of two pages (which interestingly doesn’t mention the dispatcher problem I note). I believe it’s in the report which talks about the detail of the cab being wiped down by the attacker, etc. Which is also his. I think.
I’m still looking. Why am I chasing this? I can’t remember now. Is it because we doubt the abilities of an eight year old to identify a subject? To alter the physical description accurately? Perhaps.

That is something i have always considered. The fact that when you listen to Pelisetti and Fouke’s version of how that evening unfolded, the ‘Dispatcher error’ does not make sense timeline wise. Fouke says ‘We he just past Washington st when a call came over the radio of a shooting of a at W’ton & Cherry.’ (and obviously this would have been when the description was given of a black male.) So he was seconds, minute or two away at most. In the mean time though, Pelisetti manages to arrive on scene first. He says as he got there he saw a young teenager heading straight to the cab. He ushered him back to the alcove of the house he just came from and at that point that they told me that the suspect was a white male, and not black and then he said "I couldn’t get to the radio fast enough to broadcast the info to let all the other units know". So, description ammended and gave out on radio, he walks down Cherry St slowly and cautiously, turns right onto Jackson st, walks down to the next intersection of Jackson & Maple, sees a man with a dog, asks has he seen anything, he said ‘no’. Now keep in Mind, where Pelisetti is now, is where Fouke claims he had his encounter with Z, at Jackson & Maple. But Fouke hasn’t arrived there yet obviously because Pelisetti would have encountered him. (It’s now a good few minutes sinse Pelesetti gave the updated broadcast on the radio). Pelesetti decides to turn and head back to the cab, so he walks back up Jackson, and turns left onto Cherry, and get’s half way down Cherry st to the cab, when Fouke rolls up in his cruizer. They exchange words, and Fouke claims that it was at this point that he was alerted to the description change to a white male. (How did he not hear it 10 mins previously when Pelisetti broadcast it?). And how did Pelisetti walk down to Jackson & Maple, not see Zodiac on the way down to the intersection, nor walking back up, when just seconds after Pelisetti has left Jackson & Maple to go bk up Jackson and onto Cherry, Here comes Fouke and Zodiac is right where Pelisetti had seconds ago just been! And if we leave that issue aside for a sec, how come Fouke still doesn’t know that the suspect is white, when Pelisetti gave the update over the air 10 mins before? And what took Fouke so long to get to the scene? He said himself was on Presidio Avenue and that he’d just passed Washington St and when the call came in he turned West and onto Jackson St. Now how is Pelisetti able to arrive on scene, update the description, walk down Cherry, turn onto Jackson, go down to J’son & M’le, turn, go back up Jackson st, turn back onto Cherry, and only then does Fouke appear. He’s allready on Jackson st when Pelisetti is just pulling up to the scene accordig to him!

This is contoroversial i know, but i have always wondered if his whole story, that is shot full of holes and discrepancies, was concocted by the two, or at least by one and the other went along, because Fouke did see and stop and speak to someone, and that someone was a person Fouke knew well. Not only does the account make no sense at all time line wise, but Fouke didn’t add the sighting/stop in the report of the incident. Why? Whats, if anything, is he hiding? The focus is always on ‘Why is Fouke denying stopping and speaking to the man?’ With many answering ‘Because when he realized it was Zodiac, he didn’t want to admit to letting the Zodiac slip away when they had him in their sights.’ Bull S*it! He, according to him, was under the impression the suspect was Black, so could have just said ‘I didn’t stop and detain him because the despatcher gave the description of a Black Make Suspect, this man was white, so we had no reason to stop and search him. Its despatch’s error, not mine.’ And that doesn’t answer why he didn’t even report seeing a white male in the report that night. Can’t use the ‘Because he was ahsamed he let Zodiac walk away’ because he didn’t know it was Zodiac that night, nor did anybody untill 3 days later. I’ve been adamant for a while now, Fouke is hiding something more he knows about that night!

Welsh Chappie, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Wed Mar 06, 2013 6:02 am

OK, thanks matey. Where are you reading that, can you chuck up a link, or just name the page and the site or something? It’ll stop me going around in circles!

Y’know one day we’ll have all the police report and FBI text on-line and searchable, so we can just go look, definitively.
Perhaps that’s a retirement project.

http://www.zodiackiller.com/StineReport1.html

smithy, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Wed Mar 06, 2013 10:54 am

http://www.zodiackiller.com/StineReport1.html

Thanks! Yes, that’s the two-pager which I know doesn’t contain what I was after.
I think the bit I want is in the FBI files then. Ho hum.

About your other musings. Hmmmm!
I can only surmise that the despatcher mangled a report from the kids – or the responsible adult – and on that basis gave out the description of a BMA in the first transmission – the one that alerted everyone in the first place.
That it didn’t come from a pollice officer – and that’s why Pelisetti corrected it, having heard it was wrong "on arrival".
If that was obvious to everyone else, sorry!

In respect to who was where – I’ve read elsewhere that one of the kids left the building and followed the attacker on up the street. That would fit with the idea that P. saw him outside – coming back to the cab from his jaunt maybe – or just being brave, nosey and dumb.
The idea he (P.) walked out and then met Fouke on the way back also works. He didn’t go far. And I don’t blame him, personally.
The idea that he’d called in the amended description but Fouke hadn’t yet heard it in a re-transmit – well, that also works.

In respect to the timings – well, this is real life. How far away Fouke thought he was when he heard the report, how long it took P. to walk out and back, all that stuff? I’m happy it doesn’t agree very well – but still doesn’t have to give rise to some kind of plot, for my money.
If you watch that video and ask yourself do P. and Fouke even like each other, never mind have been in cahoots for 40 years, it’s kind of revealing.

KEY.SMITH697, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Wed Mar 06, 2013 11:36 am

:study: I do agree with you Chappie,
Fouke is hiding something more…
he knows about that night.
You can tall by Fouke eyes, when
he give his report on you2.
He is not revealing :scratch: something.
I believe he stopped and had words
with Z.

Welsh Chappie, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Wed Mar 06, 2013 12:06 pm

http://www.zodiackiller.com/StineReport1.html

Thanks! Yes, that’s the two-pager which I know doesn’t contain what I was after.
I think the bit I want is in the FBI files then. Ho hum.

About your other musings. Hmmmm!
I can only surmise that the despatcher mangled a report from the kids – or the responsible adult – and on that basis gave out the description of a BMA in the first transmission – the one that alerted everyone in the first place.
That it didn’t come from a pollice officer – and that’s why Pelisetti corrected it, having heard it was wrong "on arrival".
If that was obvious to everyone else, sorry!

In respect to who was where – I’ve read elsewhere that one of the kids left the building and followed the attacker on up the street. That would fit with the idea that P. saw him outside – coming back to the cab from his jaunt maybe – or just being brave, nosey and dumb.
The idea he (P.) walked out and then met Fouke on the way back also works. He didn’t go far. And I don’t blame him, personally.
The idea that he’d called in the amended description but Fouke hadn’t yet heard it in a re-transmit – well, that also works.

In respect to the timings – well, this is real life. How far away Fouke thought he was when he heard the report, how long it took P. to walk out and back, all that stuff? I’m happy it doesn’t agree very well – but still doesn’t have to give rise to some kind of plot, for my money.
If you watch that video and ask yourself do P. and Fouke even like each other, never mind have been in cahoots for 40 years, it’s kind of revealing.

Yeah, maybe it was going overboard of me to suggest Fouke knew the man, or is outrite lying about what the events of that night were. But its only because it just doesn’t make sense.

But regarding the despatcher, i think what may have happened was the teen who was on the phone to the despatcher probably said the man was still at the scene at present, and the despatcher then probably asked ‘Can you give me a description of the man who is attacking the driver?’ And the Teen probably said ‘Male….Black, Black jacket…’ And the despatcher mis-heared or didn’t hear the ‘Jacket’ bit and assumed the witness had said Male, Black.

Welsh Chappie, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Wed Mar 06, 2013 12:26 pm

:study: I do agree with you Chappie,
Fouke is hiding something more…
he knows about that night.
You can tall by Fouke eyes, when
he give his report on you2.
He is not revealing :scratch: something.
I believe he stopped and had words
with Z.

Me too. I imagine Fouke probably saw the man from a fair distance, and slowed as he got closer, and pulled to a stop right next to the man on the sidewalk just 2/3 yards away from him. Fouke may have gestured Z over, or even called him closer (either way, i think Z is probably telling the truth when he said ‘This cop pulled up & called me over’.

I think there is even a chance Zodiac was right at the door of Foukes car, leaning down and talking to him briefly through the patrol car window, and then Zodiac motions with his hand in the direction he saw the ‘Man with a gun running’ while Z’s other hand is in his pocket on the handle of his gun ready to take Foukes head off if he tries to exit the car and search him (Cause don’t forget, not only did Z have the murder weapon on him, but he also had a large peice of torn shirt covered in the Blood of the Cab Driver stashed in his pocket, or under his jacket, and he would be more than aware that geting caught with these two items on him is going to leave even Melvin Beli scratching his head to come up with some sort of defense in court.

In one respect i often think Donald Fouke probably owe’s his life to the mistake of a dispatcher because had the been given the correct description of White Male, crew cut & wearing Glasses, he no doubt would have stopped, got out of his cruizer, and then it’s left up to the God’s as to who can draw and fire first. Flip the coin though and it’s just as likely that had the description been given correct, i would not be here typing this because Zodiac would be the one that may have ended up either arrested, or shot dead there on Jackson…either way, we’d know Zodiac’s name. Well, thats if LE found his other guns and linked them to previous Z murders.

Thats a point, he used a different gun in ever shooting attack. Was he disposing of each firearm after each attack in which he used the gun? Again, if he did and this explains the different gun each time, then that again suggests he’s not only aware of forensic evidence, but also Ballistics.

tahoe27, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Wed Mar 06, 2013 1:04 pm

I don’t think there was a 16 year old. the third kid is probably the eight year old.

Pelisetti said he never left that scene. That report is signed by a few cops. Sounds like someone else must have spoken with the 8 year old.

The reportee is probably Dad at that point.

tahoe27, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Wed Mar 06, 2013 1:07 pm

Fouke may have gestured Z over, or even called him closer (either way, i think Z is probably telling the truth when he said ‘This cop pulled up & called me over’.

While I agree with your statement…too many people forget about Zelms.

Fouke was driving. Zodiac was on Zelms side. IF Zodiac spoke to anyone, it was ZELMS.

Welsh Chappie, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Wed Mar 06, 2013 1:45 pm

Fouke may have gestured Z over, or even called him closer (either way, i think Z is probably telling the truth when he said ‘This cop pulled up & called me over’.

While I agree with your statement…too many people forget about Zelms.

Fouke was driving. Zodiac was on Zelms side. IF Zodiac spoke to anyone, it was ZELMS.

Yes but that could be why they ‘Called him over’. If Z was on the right side of Jackson St to a patrol car as it came up the hill and approaced, then Zealms would have been closer to Zodiac, and on his side of the road basiclally. But theres a lane of traffic between them now, so it may have been that Fouke pulled over and they gestured Zodiac over to the car, and then he would have walked round to Foukes side on the sidewalk. It does seem logical what Z sayd about them calling him over because they would have been on the other side of the street to him and given the affluent, upper middle class neighbourhood it was, they probably were reluctant to shout across the street "HAVE YOU SEEN A MAN WITH A GUN ANYWHERE?" Wouldn’t want to panic the residents, so Zealms probably either gestured or simply called ‘Police Officer, cross to our side for a quick word please’ or words to that effect.

Just a theory.

But Tahoe, your theory is just as likely, maybe Fouke spun the car around and went back down the St and pulled up next to him on Foukes side.

Tahoe, if Zealms diddo the talking to Zodiac i would imagine he told his wife as he told her about the stopping a suspect. As far as i am aware, didn’t Zelms widdow say that it was Fouke who spoke to Z?

Welsh Chappie, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Wed Mar 06, 2013 1:58 pm

The only reason i think Fouke probably saw Z from his side up close is because he seemed to recall in great detail what Z was wearing.

I tell you what wouldn’t surpprise me if it happened? Fouke, if and when he’s on his death bed, comes clean and admits what actually happened that night. I mean if Eric Zelms widdow has said that her late husband had told her that yes, he and Fouke did stop and speak to a suspect that night, then what possible reason would she have for making up that about her deceased husband? I mean before Fouke gets too old and starts to get confused, forgetful etc, that someone sits down with him just one on one, and asks him to please tell them what really happened that night. Or i hope he maybe leaves a sealed envelope with his lawyer/family member that is to be opened only after his death and tell the truth that way.

Stine and his family have no justice so they can never rest not knowing who shot Paul.

The least i think he and his family deserves, is to be told the truth.

tahoe27, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:16 pm

I believe Zodiac was walking down Jackson on the side of the Presidio. If Fouke were driving, Zodiac would have been on Zelms side.

Zelms widow did say they stopped and talked with him. I know at least one family member says that Fouke report is BS.

Quagmire, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Wed Mar 06, 2013 7:26 pm

I feel that Fouke did indeed slow down to almost a standstill and Zelms might well have hollered over to the guy to ask if he saw which way a black guy was running. I don’t believe the encounter was any more than a couple of seconds though and as Fouke would have been on the opposite side driving, I’m not sure I’d trust his detailed description of Z 100%.

I do however feel he got a bit of a look at him to give a rough idea of Z’s appearance and probably felt an idiot for letting Z walk off and not noticing this guy was covered in blood, etc. I think he filled in some extra details from his imagination to make himself seem more competent as a cop.

Can’t see any reason for not continuing to stick to his version of the story forever though as otherwise he’ll have to admit that Z was right (Fouke pulled a goof) and that he has been lying.

Welsh Chappie, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Fri Mar 08, 2013 9:47 am

I feel that Fouke did indeed slow down to almost a standstill and Zelms might well have hollered over to the guy to ask if he saw which way a black guy was running. I don’t believe the encounter was any more than a couple of seconds though and as Fouke would have been on the opposite side driving, I’m not sure I’d trust his detailed description of Z 100%.
I do however feel he got a bit of a look at him to give a rough idea of Z’s appearance and probably felt an idiot for letting Z walk off and not noticing this guy was covered in blood, etc. I think he filled in some extra details from his imagination to make himself seem more competent as a cop.

Can’t see any reason for not continuing to stick to his version of the story forever though as otherwise he’ll have to admit that Z was right (Fouke pulled a goof) and that he has been lying.

Quagmire. I would agree with you on the highlighted sentence, but….

I believe Fouke saw & spoke with Zodiac for longer than a few seconds, and did so up close. Foukes description in and of itself is questionable, but when you compare Fouke’s description of what Z was wearing with Bryan Hartnell Descripton of what Z was wearing at Berryessa, then the two seem to corroborate each other.

Hartnell Description:
1. Pleated Pants, Black or Dark blue in color.
2. Blue windbreaker Jacket with collar.
3. Footprint found at scene suggest offender wore a Navy type Wingwalker Boot.

Fouke’s Description:
1. Brown/Rust color Pleated Pants.
2. Blue Windbreaker Zip up jacket with Collar.
3. Engineering Type Boots, Tan in Color.

Based on the above, i think Fouke’s description is given more credibility because it matches almost exactly what Bryan Hartnells attacker was wearing.

smithy, Subject: Re: Anyone know who this is referring to? Fri Mar 08, 2013 10:32 am

Mr Fouke’s "engineering boots" description has changed over time.
The similarity between those descriptions, then, is pleated trousers (of different colours), and a windbreaker jacket.
But wait – did Bryan really describe the jacket as blue?
Were the famous "Wing Walkers" ever produced in tan?